Cifas marker help

grumbler

eskbanker said:

grumbler said:

eskbanker said:

London49 said:

Thank you. You make some pretty good points there. Is there anything else you feel I should add bank statements proof of funds wage slips ect ? 

If they have reason to believe that a crime has been committed then they're restricted in the extent to which they can discuss the matter with you

Why? Unless it's ML that for some stupid reason is exceptional and regulations explicitly restrict this, any crime can be discussed with a suspected criminal.

And this lost cards obviously have nothing to do with AML regulations.

I'm thinking of the SAR disclosure exemptions relating to crime - the ICO even conveniently cites a pertinent example:

Example

A bank conducts an investigation into one of their customers for suspected financial fraud. During their investigation, the bank receives a subject access request for all of the personal data they hold from the customer in question. The bank decides that they will withhold information about the investigation, because it would be likely to prejudice the investigation as the individual may abscond or destroy evidence. However, the bank is able to provide other information in response to the request which would not prejudice the investigation (for example the individual’s account details and transactions).

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-resources/individual-rights/right-of-access/what-other-exemptions-are-there/#exemption1

"During their investigation, the bank receives a subject access request for all of the personal data they hold from the customer in question. The bank decides that they will withhold information about the investigation, because it would be likely to prejudice the investigation as the individual may abscond or destroy evidence. "

In this case the 'investigation' is over as the CIFAS market was added. Are you saying that they added it without or before finishing their 'investigation'? Well, nothing can surprise me when it comes to banks' 'investigations'. And, if there really were no any transactions after the cards were reported stolen, I don't see anything here to 'investigate'.

Yes, it's silly (to put it mildly) to open 6 accounts just to have "a different account for each bet", but this isn't even close to 'misuse of facility'. And the beloved CIFAS seems to be no better than their clients, banks. Not only they allow this ambiguously named marker, but don't even bother to define it clearly. The only I can find is some 'examples', but possibly it's just me.

In other places I can find "deliberate intent of using that facility for a fraudulent purpose". If this is really the definition, I stick to my guns - this particular case has nothing to do with 'misuse'.

eskbanker

My understanding is that CIFAS effectively simply relays what they've been told by the banks, rather than making any value judgement, but am not familiar with the detail of the process - I'd assume that the supplying bank would be responsible for applying the categorisation, based on standardised definitions used within the industry (not necessarily in the public domain), as the banks obviously need to know what each marker means for when they're reading them rather than writing them, but happy to be corrected if that's not the case.

However, I'm not trying to defend anyone here, and remain baffled by it all too - if Barclays are alleging that OP has 'falsely reported a loss' and specifically 'falsely disclaimed a transaction' then, as I've already suggested to OP, it seems perfectly reasonable to push back on Barclays to state clearly what they're referring to.  I can see why opening so many accounts could be an issue for a bank but if they've specifically referred to false claims, then the multiple accounts would seem to be a red herring here.

London49

What would be the best thing to do next shall I get the sar?  Then go back to Barclays ? 

London49

If I go back to Barclays what would be the best way to contact them? Every time I phoned up I get passed around and don’t seem to get anywhere 

eskbanker

London49 said:

What would be the best thing to do next shall I get the sar?  Then go back to Barclays ? 

London49 said:

If I go back to Barclays what would be the best way to contact them? Every time I phoned up I get passed around and don’t seem to get anywhere 

I'd suggest replying in writing (or email/online form if they support that) to the letter about your complaint, stressing that you need them to tell you specifically what they're accusing you of having done - it's no good them saying that other banks shouldn't take too much notice of the CIFAS marker, when it's labelled as a serious misdemeanour, and it's only right that you're told what they're referring to, as a matter of urgency, given the impact this has on your banking arrangements.  If they're asserting that you falsely disclaimed a transaction, when you haven't disclaimed any transactions, then that's a pretty fundamental disconnect and needs to be clarified asap.

No harm in pursuing the SAR in parallel, but they have a month to respond to that, and likewise escalating to FOS is a slow process that you can't even start until the earlier of a final response from the bank or eight weeks having passed.

SupaSava2000

As an aside, I didn’t realise you could have more than one sole Barclays current account. I see there’s an option on the app to apply though.

London49

Thank you for all your help I will keep everyone updated.

yes I was stupid for opening all these accounts but they was all used genuinely, praying I can get this marker removed 

London49

Hi All so today I received my SAR back. The reason they’ve placed the marker is due to me match betting and braking the  T & Cs of the betting companies which they believe is misuse of facility  there end and warrants  the Cifas’s marker. 

From everything I can see online matched betting is completely legal in the uk

What would be the best place to go next do I go to the Fos have I got a leg to stand on? 

 

noitsnotme

What has the T&Cs of a betting company got to do with Barclays? There has to be more to it.  Have you done anything that might warrant a betting company complaining to Barclays?

eskbanker

London49 said:

Hi All so today I received my SAR back. The reason they’ve placed the marker is due to me match betting and braking the  T & Cs of the betting companies which they believe is misuse of facility  there end and warrants  the Cifas’s marker. 

From everything I can see online matched betting is completely legal in the uk

What would be the best place to go next do I go to the Fos have I got a leg to stand on? 

My understanding of the 'misuse of facility' CIFAS marker is that it relates specifically to accounts being opened for fraudulent purposes, and I can't see how your (legal) conduct meets that fairly high bar, even though opening so many accounts could be described as 'misuse' in a looser vernacular sense.

It also seems to conflict with the CIFAS data about "falsely reporting a loss" and "falsely disclaiming transaction"?

However, the comment about breaking the Ts & Cs of the betting companies is odd, unless one or more of them have accused you of fraudulent conduct to the extent of contacting your bank - you might even need to submit SARs in that direction too....

It does seem likely that you'll need to involve FOS but have you reached the end of the road with your complaint against Barclays, in terms of obtaining their final response?